PM Boris forms a government

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by daveeb

Or maybe the hard to digest English pudding Eton Mess...Bojo's speciality

Good one!

[1andrew1]

Sky News saying that BoJo's promises total £67bn. This compares to £48.6bn for Jezza and £46bn for Hunt. It's a Godsend to Labour who can now say austerity was a political not an economic decision.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Sky News saying that BoJo's promises total £67bn. This compares to £48.6bn for Jezza and £46bn for Hunt. It's a Godsend to Labour who can now say austerity was a political not an economic decision.

67 billion, chicken feed....

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Sky News saying that BoJo's promises total £67bn. This compares to £48.6bn for Jezza and £46bn for Hunt. It's a Godsend to Labour who can now say austerity was a political not an economic decision.

Not really. The spending proposals by both candidates will be funded one way or another. Jezza's plans will not be.

Which governments in recent times have left us worse off than when they came to power?

ANSWER:

1. Labour Government 1974 - 1979.
2. Labour Government 1997 - 2010.

Which governments have left us better off economically?

ANSWER:
1. Conservative Government 1979 - 1997
2. Conservative led Government: 2010 - date.

Nuff said.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not really. The spending proposals by both candidates will be funded one way or another. Jezza's plans will not be.

Which governments in recent times have left us worse off than when they came to power?

ANSWER:

1. Labour Government 1974 - 1979.
2. Labour Government 1997 - 2010.

Which governments have left us better off economically?

ANSWER:
1. Conservative Government 1979 - 1997
2. Conservative led Government: 2010 - date.

Nuff said.

Nah, pure Tory fantasy.

Who was responsible for the state of the UK finances in 2010, was bailed out to the tune of £500 billion and was the direct cause of the subsequent years of austerity?

ANSWER:

The City


.. who, BTW, both candidates are failing to focus on in their sales pitch to the faithful.

[Dave42]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Not really. The spending proposals by both candidates will be funded one way or another. Jezza's plans will not be.

Which governments in recent times have left us worse off than when they came to power?

ANSWER:

1. Labour Government 1974 - 1979.
2. Labour Government 1997 - 2010.

Which governments have left us better off economically?

ANSWER:
1. Conservative Government 1979 - 1997
2. Conservative led Government: 2010 - date.

Nuff said.

you really need to come off fantasy island OB

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Nah, pure Tory fantasy.

Who was responsible for the state of the UK finances in 2010, was bailed out to the tune of £500 billion and was the direct cause of the subsequent years of austerity?

ANSWER:

The City


.. who, BTW, both candidates are failing to focus on in their sales pitch to the faithful.

The City was not exactly whiter than white, but we are talking gover ment performance here. The Labour Party, in both periods of office, spent all the money so it was unable to deal with the financial crisis.

The way Gordon was carrying on with his spending spree we would have ended up bankrupt one way or another even without the crash. It might have taken a couple or three years longer, but the end result would have been the same.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The City was not exactly whiter than white, but we are talking gover ment performance here. The Labour Party, in both periods of office, spent all the money so it was unable to deal with the financial crisis.

The way Gordon was carrying on with his spending spree we would have ended up bankrupt one way or another even without the crash. It might have taken a couple or three years longer, but the end result would have been the same.

Historical data on public sector net debt against GDP does not support that statement (and I’m no fan of Labour) - Labour’s PSND vs GDP was lower in 2007 than when they took power in 1997 (then the crash happened).

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-...nt-debt-to-gdp

True, except the incoming Labour government in 1997 committed to sticking to Tory spending plans until 1999. You’ll see on your graph that those Tory spending plans significantly reduced the net debt, right up to the point when Gordon Brown abandoned them. From 1999 until the crash, when a Labour chancellor pursued a Labour economic policy, it increased year on year. It is this year on year increase, at a time when the economy was booming and conventional wisdom said the chancellor should have continued to pay down the debt, not increase it, that Labour was rightly pilloried for in the 2010 election campaign.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

This is so amusing. The Left is oh so happy to deride spending pledges being made by the two contenders for PM and yet don't bat an eyelid at Corbyn's ideas for a spending frenzy funded by his money tree!

I would respectfully remind everyone that it is the Conservatives who have the good reputation when it comes to the economy. If you spend more money and cut taxes, clearly the money does have to come from somewhere. Just because neither Hunt nor Johnson have explained where the money is coming from does not mean they don't have a proper plan.

Boris is considering reducing the size of the Cabinet by half, which will save billions, as well as reducing the international aid budget, for starters.

The Left have also consistently failed to understand that by reducing taxes in a managed way, you can actually increase revenues. Of course, the Left would not want to acknowledge that anyway as it would take away their 'logic' for increasing taxes on the rich. The politics of envy.

Update - no, he isn’t...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/j...TM_1Imag_CR1_2

The former foreign secretary has been forced to distance himself from several policies floated by his supporters this week, including increasing public-sector pay and halving the size of the cabinet...

...He subsequently denied that he was considering a pledge by his supporters to reduce the size of his cabinet by merging government departments.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Update - no, he isn’t...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/j...TM_1Imag_CR1_2

Clearly, the press were a bit premature there! However, Boris has plenty of alternative ideas to offset the giveaways, including his idea for six tax-free zones. This is the kind of fresh outlook we need to reinvigorate this country post Brexit.- and it is the kind of example I drew attention to earlier that the economic forecasters would not have taken into account.

I see a bright new future ahead, and those that have been trying to reverse the democratic decision of this country will scarcely be able to comprehend what has happened.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-zones-around/

Half a dozen Singapore-style tax-free zones could be established around Britain to drive forward the economy after Brexit under proposals being considered by Boris Johnson.

The Conservative leadership favourite confirmed that creating tax-free zones in ports - where goods can be landed in the UK but not be subject to any duties - was part of his vision for the country after Britain leaves in October.

Ports on the UK’s east coast including Teesside, Aberdeen and Peterhead could become economic zones, considered independent for customs purposes, that charge no taxes or tariffs on imports.

Singapore is considered a tax haven because of its low personal and corporate tax rates and other incentives for foreign investors.

Mr Johnson said: "That's the sort of thing we can do. But first we've got leave the EU. We could do free ports, we could get a massive boost for this economy, but only once we've come out.

"I want to have about six of them. We should definitely be doing free ports and tax free zones. They have delivered around the world, there are about 130 countries who have them. We don't because of our membership of the EU.

"There are plainly areas that would benefit from them. We will build them all over the place, particularly Northern Ireland."

The proposal - also backed by Mr Johnson's rival Jeremy Hunt - was welcomed by the Federation of Small Businesses, which said it “would be transformational for this society, whether you are a unionist, nationalist or neither”.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Clearly, the press were a bit premature there! However, Boris has plenty of alternative ideas to offset the giveaways, including his idea for six tax-free zones. This is the kind of fresh outlook we need to reinvigorate this country post Brexit.- and it is the kind of example I drew attention to earlier that the economic forecasters would not have taken into account.

I see a bright new future ahead, and those that have been trying to reverse the democratic decision of this country will scarcely be able to comprehend what has happened.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-zones-around/

Half a dozen Singapore-style tax-free zones could be established around Britain to drive forward the economy after Brexit under proposals being considered by Boris Johnson.

The Conservative leadership favourite confirmed that creating tax-free zones in ports - where goods can be landed in the UK but not be subject to any duties - was part of his vision for the country after Britain leaves in October.

Ports on the UK’s east coast including Teesside, Aberdeen and Peterhead could become economic zones, considered independent for customs purposes, that charge no taxes or tariffs on imports.

Singapore is considered a tax haven because of its low personal and corporate tax rates and other incentives for foreign investors.

Mr Johnson said: "That's the sort of thing we can do. But first we've got leave the EU. We could do free ports, we could get a massive boost for this economy, but only once we've come out.

"I want to have about six of them. We should definitely be doing free ports and tax free zones. They have delivered around the world, there are about 130 countries who have them. We don't because of our membership of the EU.

"There are plainly areas that would benefit from them. We will build them all over the place, particularly Northern Ireland."

The proposal - also backed by Mr Johnson's rival Jeremy Hunt - was welcomed by the Federation of Small Businesses, which said it “would be transformational for this society, whether you are a unionist, nationalist or neither”.

"Premature"?

What scoundrels, actually reporting what Boris and his cohorts said, without giving them time to backtrack...

Nice to see you’re following the BJ mantra of "I didn’t actually say that" (even though there is recorded video evidence of him saying it), and the old faithful "it has been taken out of context"...

Originally Posted by Hugh

"Premature"?

What scoundrels, actually reporting what Boris and his cohorts said, without giving them time to backtrack...

Nice to see you’re following the BJ mantra of "I didn’t actually say that" (even though there is recorded video evidence of him saying it), and the old faithful "it has been taken out of context"...

[Sephiroth]

I have voted!

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Nah, pure Tory fantasy.

Who was responsible for the state of the UK finances in 2010, was bailed out to the tune of £500 billion and was the direct cause of the subsequent years of austerity?

ANSWER:

The City


.. who, BTW, both candidates are failing to focus on in their sales pitch to the faithful.

The Labour government was borrowing on a massive scale long before 2008(ie 2002), and was doing it when the economy was supposedly in such good shape that there shouldn't have been a need for any borrowing. THAT was the reason for austerity.